Persepolis and Epileptic

I have never read a "graphic memoir" so to speak, and really enjoy the depths both of these works were able to traverse. In White's article he says, "that narrative discourse serves the purpose of moralizing judgments." I think these works would support his thesis. Persepolis argues for a different world view of Iran and Epileptic argues for an understanding of incomprehensible diseases; while at the same time coping with issues of identity, family, and suffering.

Epileptic and Persepolis both stick to black and white but the effect is different. What is the significance of the different effects created by black and white in these two works and how does it add to there storyline or mood?

Persepolis employs very cartoonish drawings and never employs fully realistic drawings. It also keeps to a simple black and white format with very little shadowing. It is a linear story and allows the reader to be drawn into that world completely. The black is not a looming threat or a depressing tone (pg. 52). It is simply performing its function as a background, color of clothing, etc. It allows the focus to be on the storyline and makes it that much more translatable to the masses.

Epileptic also uses cartoonish drawings but also uses some realistic drawings and that is a ton of shadowing throughout. In this book the darkness seem ominous, desolate, and insatiable. Page 42 uses just blackness to show the doctors and the reader immediately knows its bad. On page 113 it seems to be trying to swallow Jean-Christophe and on page 122 you can see how the shadow use can add a dark tone on a character.

So in Epileptic the darkness is there for a very specific reason. What is the significance of darkness being so ominous and looming?

The way I saw it, darkness was a symbol of sickness. And not just Jean-Christophe's sickness but also to the subsequent sicknesses of the family. His mother is haunted, his sister severely depressed, and David contains a rage (maybe from inability to express his feelings or save his brother). If seen in this way it can represent a visual balance of Characters vs. Darkness. It threatens to engulf every person and one must not succumb. Towards the end (pg 144) Jean-Christophe is shown as in all black. He is unable to fight of this Epilepsy and the visual rendering impacts the reader on a very symbolical and emotional level.

Blues and Reds

I have never read anything like "The Sandman." I loved the way it invoked realism and also incorporated fantasy and even symbolism. It is the type of book that after finishing it, I cannot seem to stop thinking about it. I wanted to know the significance of Dream's dark personality.

He is usually wearing something dark/blue and something ominous like a massive cloak or trench coat and is very often pessimistic seeming. I thought this could be a commentary on the nature of dreams themselves (that we often dream of things we are scared of) or if it was intended to turn our concept of death upside down (the fact that his character could easily be taken for Death, but is actually DREAM is interesting to me). This led me to ask what is the significance of the color blue and its relationship to Dream?

In almost every panel of Dream blue is accented or stands out. His hair, skin, cloak, and even his eyes. When we see things from his perspective everything is in blue.McCloud says, "Colors could express a dominant mood and whole scenes could be virtually about color." Page 34 you see Dream's face for the first time and his eyes, hair, and the bubble he is in is blue. Normally blue indicated calmness or serenity. To me, this effect of blue makes me think of Dream more as the ocean. It can be calm and beautiful yet it can also be powerful and dangerous.

I also wanted to find the significance of Dream and the red. Dream's cloak is the only thing that ever is seen as red. It seems to me that red signifies the supernatural. His cloak is always red when the hem of it is contains faces (maybe dreams?? pg. 89) and most of the time in hell or the dreamworld its red (pg 191). If red usually means anger and blue usually means calm then what is the significance of that?

Is the author trying to say that life is more calm then dreams or that dreams are filled with anger and the supernatural? Even Death's character is more happy and peppy than Dream. Maybe it is as simple as we are being warned of the power of dreams and being told to pay attention to them.

Maus

Maus By Art Spiegelman is an amazing accomplishment. It is able to present difficult material to in audience in a way that is easily translated to all humanity. It builds a bridge of communication that other forms like essay or straight up biography would not be able to accomplish. It uses cartoonish animals to draw you into its own world. Understand Comics by Scott McCloud states that, "By de-emphasizing the appearance of the pysical world in favor of the idea of the form, the cartoon places itself in the world of concepts." This idea struck me. If Maus is a world of concepts filled with icons and symbols then is it meant to be reality or only conceptulize reality. Hayden White's article on The Content of Form implies that narration naturally makes reality ideal. It makes the world whole and with meaning. However, in Maus, I think it has the opposite effect. The cartoonish quality absolutely draws us into this world. This world does has icons and concepts within this world. However, this world is not ideal. This world is not whole and nothing fits neatly into shelves. Art and his father do not get along at all nor do they even seem to relate to each other. His father is still left dealing with all the pain of his past. Art is left with all the pressure for not being his Richieu. Vladack is a racist. Art is fighting with the moral issue of turning this history into a commodity. Everywhere you look nothing is ideal. Especially the past parts of the story. I do not think anyone would find the holocaust ideal. So in my opinion Spiegelman is able to tell a narrative story with some quality of a whole and complete story without giving us a whole and complete story in White's terms. It is quite paradoxal.
Also reading Maus the use of masks was intriguing to me. I did not see while Spiegelman would do this. After a while I made the connection to identity. Spiegelman brings the complicated issue of identity/nationality to the forefront by not only each animal signifying a nationality but also with the use of masks. To wear of mask one hides one's true self. The characters do it often to hide they identity for their own safety. However, in part 2 Spiegelman himself wears a mask. The matter of his own (which makes it the reader's own) identity is up in the air at times. For many people who are second generation to a horrible event have a sense of survivor guilt for not going through what their parents went through. Art seems to have this self loathing at points and even on the cover of part 1 is seen to be smoking ciggerretes that are "crematorium" brand. He obviously is caught up with where he fits into the world. Vladack also seems to not be able to re-enter society in a normal fashion. The reader relates and can connect to this idea and that is why the use of masks is so great. This led me to ask why he used such standard paneling. Most of the panels are in a orderly fashion with no abstract paneling occuring. Then when I looked more closely I realized every once in a while he did break this form and throw in a giant frame. When I re-read these sections I started to understand that this makes the reader pause and really take in the view of the larger image. It's almost like a dramatic pause in movies. When they finally get to the camp it is a huge panel and you almost hold your breath as you take in this ominous image. Art Spiegelman did wonderful things in Maus that everyone can recognize. I think White would be proud and a little confused all at once.